Major visions of practitioners in this field

From Gaza to Myanmar and Sudan, societies around the world still suffer from the consequences of war, civil conflict and sectarian violence. Indeed, in 2024, 111 countries I witnessed some forms of collective atrocities Against civilians.

While it is important to support these societies now through humanitarian aid and pressure on the parties to end violence, it is also important to continue working as soon as the fighting is over by documenting atrocities and raising the voices of victims and survivors. Doing this helps the reconciliation process and build peace.

However, the field work in post -garbage settings is never clear. It is complex, emotionally and characterized by ethical risks.

in Modern article Posted in Genocide Research MagazineWe are six scholars, with decades experience in more than 15 countries-including Burundi, Cambodia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Nicaragua and Rwanda-gave a look behind the scenes on the challenges of work in these environments and more responsibility, comprehensive and moral steps.

Since more post-conflict areas open to researchers and practitioners-from Syria to Ukraine– We have reached five lessons to meet the basic challenges in this field and provide guidance to ensure the followers of practitioners.No harmHe approaches:

1. Do not let the marginalized voices be a later idea

From my experience, field work after domains can often depend on groups of direct accounts that include only, or for the larger part, men. Women’s stories of interference in mass violence tend to be largely absent.

This reflects how post -garbage research often ignores the effect of sexual standards and hierarchical sequences. Depending on local cultures, women are often depicted as victims by researchers, but men often have the sounds of everyone’s experiences.

Women were traditionally excluded in post -climb research because no one asked him. Their experiences were rejected as unclear men, which are formed by parental assumptions about the championship. There may also be reasons about the culture or stigma that remains from the violence that controls the voices of women.

However, the interviews with which women revealed that women played vital roles – saving lives, resisting violence and stopping the militias. Ironically, it was often their political concealment that enabled the intervention of women.

As such, the approach of best practices in the post-ascension field may include researchers including marginalized voices from the beginning-especially women, ethnic and ethnic minorities, and members of groups that have been historically excluded-and the use of methods that reveal how to remember the strength, identity and vision form.
–Nicole FoxAssociate Professor of Criminal Justice, California State University, Sacramento

2. The place is a method, not just a mentality

Mobility PositionThat is, the place of a specific individual in society depends on factors such as sex, class and race-in post-geainous research is difficult and necessary.

It is not only about self -reflection; It comes to the formation of how and why questions are asked in the places where confidence has been shattered.

Often, researchers turn, collect stories and leave. But this does not embody the live facts of people who survived mass violence.

To avoid this, it is important to build teams that include both the families and strangers. For example, we assembled a team to conduct the field work that included a Rwandan genocide, South African world and an American world. We have come from different regions, specializations and life experiences. It is important, our Rwandan colleague was a partner in full research in addition to working as a translator. He gave his existence access and confidence that we could not win alone.

For researchers in sensitive contexts, building cooperative and studied teams is not only moral – it is systematically necessary.

This commitment to critical thinking and research design also plays on how researchers from the global south are moving in Western academic spaces mostly.
– Stephanie Wolf, Professor of Political Science at Wiper State University

As an African researcher among most of them Western scholars, I found that I was supposed to be first of African origin and the second researcher-who was a double-edged sword.

It included having to withstand inquiries from colleagues who were often more personal than professional, and had to prove “African” enough for white researchers.

These experiments made it difficult to be taken seriously. As one of the few scientists born in Africa in the field of post -garbage research working in the United States, it was important not to be strange. The place is not a footnote – it is a lens and your live experience.

As a field researcher, it is important to create spaces for the most diverse scientists so that they can conduct research without constantly reducing value or testing it.
–Claudine Satan MceloosLecturer in peace, human rights and cultural relations at the American University

3. Secondary shock is real and needs our attention

If the shock is caused by direct experience, the secondary shock occurs as people or interacting with those who have suffered directly.

Secondary shock experience is often specific to conduct field research. Conducting interviews with the survivors of violence can leave the researcher with pictures, sounds and indirect relationships of shocks.

Next, post -garbage researchers have a real need to receive training, support and appropriate treatment. The destruction of the silent element in this type of work and the creation of spaces for speaking and sharing this element from work with shock in post -garbage situations would consider researchers in this field better.

Creating a lifeline, like support networks, in the field and abroad, is necessary to obtain the correct support when needed. It is also important for researchers to realize that secondary shock links the practitioner to our field and interviews; This can be a supplier to understand violence and how it can be prevented.

Universities can help researchers by providing resources to deal with secondary shock. In addition, the researchers themselves can find ways to talk about this type of shocks, share and treat them.

– Chris DeviLecturer in Political Science, University of Binghamton

4. Building confidence is a process, not just a result

Trying to create confidence while conducting research in the post -geneside society is difficult, but it is vital. Knowledge of cultural, linguistic and historical standards and respecting them is one of the important ways for researchers to follow the principle of “lack of harm”.

In the post -ascension contexts, researchers must deal with the movement between the complex political and political dynamics to determine who can trust it, and what organizations should be a partnership with, and what is safe to do, request, or even publish.

In some cases, researchers may also choose what to do – such as stopping or refusing an interview if someone may endanger. Practitioners are responsible for reducing risks when working in societies that have witnessed a complete collapse of trust relations.

The realization of this dynamic can be considered researchers to anticipate potential issues and manage unintended harm in a society that is already fighting to rebuild social trust.

More importantly, the construction of confidence should not be seen as a way to achieve an end, but as part of a process that practitioners in this field did not harm and alleviate the dangers of partners who live in the research environment.

– Samantha LackeenOlder colleague, Peace Center, Democracy, Development, UMASS Boston

5. Bureaucracy and authoritarian spaces

Knowing how to move safely in bureaucracy is very important to keep researchers and field -based teams safe in post -garbage settings.

Whether it means carrying documents about them, or spending additional time to meet the authorities to obtain their approval to research, or the ability to provide forms of compensation to officials, researchers must be prepared.

Taking this time may mean delaying engaging directly with survivors or other research participants, but it may often lead to an insight into the local context, safety and intersection between officials who may have unique in research topics.

Working with local partners, such as GEC-SH In the Eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo, determining expectations in this field and learning from this current experience is the key to the success of the bureaucracy – as it allocates additional time to cooperate with the authorities and understand the local context – including practices that may be characterized by “bribes”.

– Chris DeviLecturer in Political Science, University of Binghamton

This article has been republished from Conversation Under the creative public license. Read The original article.